[PATCH i-g-t] lib/igt_kmod: stop using KMOD_REMOVE_FORCE, again

[Vivekanandan, Balasubramani]

On 30.10.2024 16:49, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> Just like done in commit 93ad5b785ea0 ("lib/igt_kmod: stop using
> KMOD_REMOVE_FORCE"). From igt perspective, if a module can't be removed,
> forcing its removal is not the right thing to do: the test should just
> fail and be fixed.
> 
> If the kernel actually enforces KMOD_REMOVE_FORCE, then it would just
> taint and all tests get aborted. Lastly, our kernel config doesn't have
> CONFIG_MODULE_FORCE_UNLOAD set, so this is pointless for multiple times.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/igt_kmod.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/igt_kmod.c b/lib/igt_kmod.c
> index 75a0d057c..cc3e5e5b1 100644
> --- a/lib/igt_kmod.c
> +++ b/lib/igt_kmod.c
> @@ -1409,8 +1409,7 @@ static void __igt_kunit(struct igt_ktest *tst,
>  			char glob[1024];
>  			int i;
>  
> -			igt_skip_on(kmod_module_remove_module(tst->kmod,
> -							      KMOD_REMOVE_FORCE));
> +			igt_skip_on(kmod_module_remove_module(tst->kmod, 0));
>  			igt_skip_on(igt_kernel_tainted(&taints));
>  
>  			igt_assert_lt(snprintf(glob, sizeof(glob), "%s.%s",

Looks good.

Reviewed-by: Balasubramani Vivekanandan <balasubramani.vivekanandan at intel.com>

Regards,
Bala

> -- 
> 2.47.0
>